Skip to content

Devin/feature/add dfgm interface and handler#3

Open
dheadrick1618 wants to merge 5 commits into
mainfrom
devin/feature/add_dfgm_interface_and_handler
Open

Devin/feature/add dfgm interface and handler#3
dheadrick1618 wants to merge 5 commits into
mainfrom
devin/feature/add_dfgm_interface_and_handler

Conversation

@dheadrick1618
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

DFGM stuff moved into separate directory. Now There is an abstract dfgm interface that can be modifed later to talk to UART or TCP, and the dfgm handler doesnt care which. (Useful for either using simulated subsystem or actual hardware).

As well setup DFGM handler to write DFGM packet data as its received if a dfgm listen flag is set true. This will bring us one step closer to a tall and thin demo of the entire mission software stack.

@dheadrick1618 dheadrick1618 requested a review from rcunrau May 28, 2024 21:01
@rcunrau
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

rcunrau commented May 30, 2024

Good start! Have you thought much about how you want to manage DFGM data long term? In the Architecture Document the topic should be bulk data management and upload/download. We might need to think about circular buffers so the files don't grow without bound, and possibly a time-stamp Table of Contents so you don't always have to read the entire file. I think the DFGM probably has too much data to download through the command interface (I thought I saw that in dispatch).

@dheadrick1618
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Thanks for the feedback! I haven't thought a bunch about particulars relating to the DFGM in the spirit of trying to stick true to the 'tall and thin' implementation approach, where I implement this as the most lightweight implementation while still be useful for a subsystem interface and handler architectural components. This being said these things are in the back of my mind, I just figured I could deep dive and implement them later once we have more of a full skeleton of our entire architecture / software stack. Today I am doing to setup a simple command dispatcher, which will be responsible for sending commands to their associated subsystem handler based on the commands 'destination id'.

With this in mind, do you think I am good to merge this PR and continue on our tall and thin journey?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants